Skip to content

Joe Courtney’s Diary

U.S. Rep. Joe Courtney’s highlighting an inaccuracy in Steven Spielberg’s hit movie, “Lincoln,” is generating Washington buzz and Hollywood blowback, drawing the mild-mannered Connecticut congressman into the world of Oscar intrigue.

With the start of final Oscar voting Friday, an amused Courtney is being asked if his fact-checking was intended to defend a slighted predecessor, Augustus Brandegee of New London, or help a more recent benefactor, Ben Affleck.

Affleck’s “Argo,” an account of the Iranian hostage crisis that takes its own liberties with the facts, is in competition for Best Picture with Spielberg’s “Lincoln.” Conspiracy theorists take note: Affleck campaigned for Courtney in 2006.

(via The Connecticut Mirror)

Now it can be told, in a CTBlue exclusive, for we have gained access to Joe’s
diary.

Dear Diary:

Went to see Lincoln today. Good flick, but during the roll call scene I think I struck gold. According to the movie, Connecticut’s representatives voted against the 13th Amendment. I’m pretty sure that’s not so, not that I care, but I’m getting my campaign staff to look into it. Right away it struck me that this was a golden opportunity to do Ben Affleck a favor. Here’s the plan. I make a polite complaint about the inaccuracy, and ask that that error be corrected when the movie comes out on DVD. The thing will snowball, causing all those Oscar voters to swing their votes to Affleck’s picture. It’s the only possible outcome and of course it came to me in a flash. The beauty of it is that no one would ever suspect that I intended that result all along, because, on its face, you’d have to be a member of the tin foil hat brigade to rise to that level of paranoia and that’s just not the kind of thing that’s done in this country, where our media is always careful to avoid enabling rumor mongers and conspiracy theorists. My plan is to play on the media’s integrity. It would never give the time of day to anyone who exposed my real intentions. This plan can’t fail.

Friday night music

Thanks to MB for suggesting The Troggs, whose lead singer, Reg Presley, just died. Got to keep those dying rockers coming, as they provide great fodder for this feature.

Unfortunately, I can't use the video he suggested, as it won't play on my iPad, and given the frequent storm caused interruptions in our electrical service, we've disconnected our computers for the duration. Anyway, here they are doing a somewhat subdued version of their signature song, Wild Thing.

 

 

Apples meet oranges

I’m a fan of TPM, but an article like this cannot pass without criticism:

Trust in Fox News has fallen to a new low in the four-year history of Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling’s survey of TV news. The latest survey, released Wednesday, found that 41 percent of respondents trust the network, while 46 percent do not. In 2010, 49 percent trusted Fox, and 37 percent did not. But respondents also chose Fox News as the most trustworthy TV news outlet when given a list of the organizations PPP surveyed, beating out ABC, CBS, CNN, Comedy Central, MSNBC, NBC and PBS. Thirty-four percent of respondents chose Fox News as the most trustworthy out of that list.

(via TPM LiveWire)

To the innumerate, the results seem contradictory. In fact, it is only what any reasonably intelligent person would expect.

The 34% of the population that chose Fox as the most trustworthy is the Republican base. One would expect each and every one of them to select the network that tells them what they want to hear. The rational among us split our votes amongst a host of contenders, with, I would hazard to guess, many pulling a response more or less at random out of their nether regions. Indeed, one would expect that as the level of Fox distrust grows among the nation as a whole, the degree to which the true believers harden their position will increase. The questions, as posed, do not measure the same thing, and to the extent the article implies there is a contradiction, it does the casual reader a disservice.

A prognostication

We learn from this morning’s Day that Amazon will be building a “customer fulfillment center” here in the Nutmeg State, and will have to begin collecting sales taxes on in state purchases in November. Amazon, of course, has been in the forefront of the lobbying effort to keep states from collecting sales taxes on internet sales. Let’s look into the future, as Amazon approaches its goal of same day delivery throughout most of the nation.

That will require customer fulfillment centers in almost every state, subjecting Amazon to state sales taxes everywhere. Look for Amazon to have a change of heart, and support efforts to require its far smaller competitors to remit sales taxes to all states, rather than only to those states in which they have a physical presence. This is actually good public policy, but at that point it will be used by Amazon as a cudgel to destroy its smaller competitors.

Okay, I didn’t read far enough when I pecked the preceding out this morning. I see one of the folks the Day interviewed made the same prediction:

Pomp also said he thought Amazon would become a champion for a federal law on sales tax collection now that it will be collecting sales tax while other online retailers without a physical presence are not.

(via theday.com Mobile Edition)

Puzzling

Obama is damned by the right wing for claiming to shoot skeet, something they absolutely refuse to believe he does, not that it matters. They accuse him of violating our liberties because he made an incremental change in the law that might enable more people to afford still overpriced health care. They would love to impeach him for these things, Benghazi, and his alleged Kenyan birth.

Yet, they remain strangely quiet about the fact that he is truly a threat to real republican values (small “r” there). A republican form of government can’t coexist with a chief executive who claims the power of life or death over any citizen he chooses to kill. Obama has assumed that power to himself, and has managed to get his Justice Department to imitate John Yoo and give his assumption of power its imprimatur. Yet, oddly, only a stray liberal here or there appears to care about this unprecedented assumption of power. Politics does indeed make strange bedfellows. They have apparently concluded that their base will lustily cheer every ginned up attack they can make against Obama, except a fact based attack on him for killing anyone he chooses to label a terrorist.

The NRA’s enemies list

If you can judge an organization by those it considers its enemies, and I think you can, then ones judgment of the NRA must be rather harsh. Check out the distinguished list here. Far more thorough than Nixon’s. I wish I could get on it. 

Incompetent Canadians, or just poorly equipped?

VANCOUVER, British Columbia — Police say a man ran through the hallways of a Vancouver apartment building, slashing seven people in what they believe was a completely random attack,

Sgt. Randy Fincham said Friday seven people were injured in the high rise building on the city’s west end during the attack Thursday night. Six people were taken to hospital and one woman remains in critical condition. Another bystander was treated at the scene and released.

(via Huffington Post)

All I can say is that here in America no self respecting crazy person would ever have botched the job this badly. All that work and maybe he managed to kill one person. Now, being a democrat, with both a small and large “d”, I believe in the equality of all, so I can’t buy into the argument, which certainly suggests itself from the facts, that Americans are simply inherently superior to Canadians, and that when we set out to do a job, we do it right.

No, I firmly believe that if this guy only had the right tools, he could have done the job right. With just one Bushmaster he could have climbed into the pantheon of mass murderers, right up there with Adam Lanza and all the rest of the American heroes that have been exercising their Second Amendment rights. I mean, in the time it took him to ineffectually slash away at seven people, he could easily have blown away thirty. I think the fault lies with the Canadian government, which has put roadblocks in the way of aspiring serial killers at every turn. Well, if that’s the way the Canadians want it, fine. They may beat us at hockey now and then, but when it comes to mass murder, we’ll stay number one.

Book review review

I subscribe to the digital edition of the Literary Review, a British magazine somewhat like the New York Review of Books, except unlike the New York Review, it really is solely dedicated to reviewing books.

I downloaded the February issue a few minutes ago, and seeing the word “Assholes” on the cover, without further elaboration, I just had to seek out the content inside to which this teaser applied.

Well, I wasn’t disappointed. The book under review is called Assholes, a Theory, by Aaron James. I’m very much hoping the book is as funny as the review, since after reading the review, I felt I just had to get the book. Certain it is that assholes seem to be proliferating faster than most varieties of humans. This perception, which I’m sure is widely shared, may not be true, however. It  may be that assholes may just have thrust themselves into positions of both power and visibility in greater numbers now than previously. Of course this is a chicken and egg sort of situation. Is it, for instance, harder for a non-asshole to get elected to office than for a camel to pass through an eye of a needle because being an asshole is a necessary pre-condition to being a successful politician, or is it because the assholes, once they got a foothold, changed the rules of the game so that only an asshole would want to play? I favor the latter theory. Being a political observer for many years, I would hardly deny that there have always been assholes in the political profession, but never, until recently, has it been the case that one of the two major parties was populated entirely by assholes, while the other was merely dominated by the breed.

As I said, the review is funny, but also perceptive. Certainly you can’t argue with the reviewer’s (Michael Bywater) choices for perfect exemplars of the type:

Identifying them is easy. James fingers, among others, Donald Trump, Silvio Berlusconi, Simon Cowell and Mel Gibson. He claims, plausibly, that George W Bush wasn’t an asshole, but was in thrall to a lot of them, most notably the asshole’s asshole, Donald ‘Asshole’ Rumsfeld. The argument is readily extended. The current coalition government is mostly composed, not of assholes (with the surprising exception of Iain Duncan Smith), but of twats, amateurs and posh fuckwits. It may be a flaw in James’s thesis that he lacks the experience of the Etonian asshole; but, equally, he lacks the counter-argument of royalty, the great advantage of which is that it guarantees that our nominal head of state may, as occasionally happens, be a tyrant, a shmuck or an idiot, but never an asshole because his or her supreme entitlement is constitutionally enshrined so need not ever be exerted.

(via Literary Review – Michael Bywater on Aaron James)

Of course there’s plenty to quibble with there. Mr. Bywater is British, and can be forgiven for his credulous acceptance of James’s assertion that George W. Bush is not an asshole. We Americans know better, but we had far more exposure to the man. So, just as we can be forgiven for not recognizing the “Etonian asshole”, Bywater can be forgiven for not recognizing the American equivalent.

As a man, I was heartened to learn that, while my sex contributes the vast majority of assholes to the planet, women can qualify, as Bywater convincingly demonstrates:

Perhaps controversially, James also questions the belief that assholes are always men. Received opinion has it that a female who betrays asshole qualities is, by simple linguistic convention, referred to as a ‘bitch’. Not so – he cites as an example the rabid right-wing ‘commentator’, the spittle-flecked horror Ann Coulter. The difference? ‘The bitch betrays you behind your back. The asshole fails to recognize [your justifiable complaints] to your face.’

A thoroughly convincing argument. I highly recommend this book review, which is why I’m reviewing it here. It was timely reading for me. I had a trial scheduled for this coming week in which the plaintiff (I’m representing the defendants) is, without doubt, the biggest asshole it has ever been my misfortune to meet, which is saying a lot, because that means he tops any asshole lawyer I’ve ever run into, and though I have nothing but respect for most members of my profession, the assholes among us are of the first water. So, click on the link and read the entire review. Unless you’re an asshole.

Friday Night Music

It’s a shame that the Beatles stopped live performances at some point in their career, so that for a fairly large percentage of their time together, there are only videos like this of some of their better songs. This is topical and, since the right tends to not get irony, might very well become the theme song for the NRA.

Sarah bows out

Sarah Palin has been in the news lately for no longer being in the news. Providing, of course that you call Fox news. Mostly Sarah is now the butt of jokes, like here. Yes, Sarah is done. She made a lot of money, and may make more in the future, but her days of high profile grifting are over, and I just want to say I told you so, even though I told you so while wrongly predicting she’d run in 2012:

For a number of Republicans, running for President has nothing to do with actually wanting to be President-it’s a money making move. Sarah has found, in recent months, that even the idiot media can in fact get enough of her if she’s not in the game. Her shelf life has nearly expired and the only way to reinvigorate it is for her to get back in the mix. She can keep her brand in the black for years after the next election, because after she loses she can play the victim of the media, the Democrats, and the Republican establishment, which she can blame for denying her the nomination she doesn’t really want. She could potentially grift for at least four more years nursing that grievance, and go out with an avalanche of cash in 2012 by going the distance as a third party candidate. If she doesn’t get back in the game she’ll just be another Christine O’Donnell, reduced to walking off of a TV set just to generate some short term buzz.

(via CT Blue › A prediction)

Poor Sarah, she didn’t even get to do that walk off. She was kicked off instead.

Addendum: I put this post in the “Sarah Palin” category. This is probably the last time I use that category, making it one of many orphans in the strip running down the right hand side of the page. Perhaps none of those orphans acquired that status faster than the “Mitt Romney” category. Remember him? He ran for president once.